Lack of FTM is a bit annoying as I use this as part of a two camera setup with a 50-150 OS which DOES have FTM and I kee forgetting.

I really wish that people who get obviously faulty lenses would not use a review as a stick with which to beat Sigma. It skews the results and it's not a fair review. If the lens is faulty, you can't say which aspects of performance were down to the lens design and which were because of the fault. If a lens is faulty send it back. If the next one is faulty and you decide to get your money back, don't post a review of a lens which, by reason of it being faulty, you are not qualified to make.

Rant over. This is still my go to site for lens reviews.

This 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM lens is superb. I use it as half of a two camera setup with a 50-150mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM on a pair of Canon 70Ds and find the combination brilliant for weddings and other such gatherings.

I use the 70Ds for video, too. One tripod mounted and static taking the main scene, the other on a monopod or steadicam to do cutaways and candids. I use Canon STM lenses for the silence on video, but in low llight I use Sigma F1.4/1.8 lenses and an external sound recorder.

For photography though, the 17-50 is on my camera virtually all the time. I use 8-16, 17-50, 50-150 Sigma lenses and a Canon 100-400 to give me reliability, versatility and sharp images from 8-400 with only a couple of changes involved. I'm very happy with the Canon/Sigma combination.

Jun 6, 2015

ScottUmstattdOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 16, 2014Location: MexicoPosts: 0

Review Date: Oct 21, 2014

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8

Pros:

Excellent color and sharpness. Nice bokeh. Very useful lens.

Cons:

Maybe a little faster focus would be nice.

Travel and street photographers often carry their lenses and cameras around all day long. The extra weight that comes with big glass lenses can wear some people down after several hours. This lens' size and weight make it an excellent choice for photographers who always need to be ready. Also the smaller size allows it to fit more comfortably on the smaller entry level DSLRs.

After several years of use, I traded this lens in (and a Sigma 10-20mm) to get a Canon 15-85mm. While I enjoy the wider zoom range of the Canon, the Sigma 17-50 takes better pictures.

Good build, sharp photos, 2.8, great stabilizer, great price. This is my first "good" standard zoom, and I am honestly blown away by it.

Cons:

I have a very difficult time coming up with cons for an item when I know I am a "bang for the buck" type shopper. I guess I wish the focus ring was just a little bigger and had a little more travel in it.

May 22, 2014

ebiggsOfflineBuy and Sell: On

Registered: Mar 16, 2013Location: United StatesPosts: 626

Review Date: Apr 1, 2014

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $469.00
| Rating: 8

Pros:

What else, price! Sigma has a instant $200 rebate right now.
Comes with hood, a pinch lens cap and a soft case. Lately any Sigma lens with at least the EX or Art rating is a very nice lens and a good buy.

Cons:

The front focus ring moves as the lens focuses. Not a deal breaker but you must be aware of it and keep your hands off.

In real world shooting you will not likely be able to tell the difference between this lens and Canon's.
If, on the other hand, you are a pixel peeper you can see some difference.
There is some CA on the right side of mine at f2.8 but you need a 100% crop to see it at all.
Mine is very sharp. Better than it's price would indicate.
I use mine on a 7D and I have the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 to go along with it. Makes a nice combo.

Apr 1, 2014

cocheseOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 21, 2014Location: United StatesPosts: 0

Review Date: Feb 21, 2014

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $375.00
| Rating: 9

Pros:

small and relatively light. OS works well. HSM is quick, just shy of Canon's USM, and on par with Tamrons USD. Well built and great price

Cons:

No FTM.

I did a lot of research before pulling the trigger on this lens. I knew I wanted a fast standard lens but the price of the Canon 17-55 was WAY out of reach. I have had the lens for about a week and taken several hundred images. I can allay your fears, this lens is sharp, even wide open. The focus is fast and the OS on par with Sigma's 4 stop claim and I am getting 3.5 very consistently. The build quality is excellent, this thing just feels nice in my hands. I wish Sigma could have added FTM, but that is really my only gripe. Highly recommended!

I love this lens. It is relatively small and light for a f/2.8 zoom, and optically great. My copy is very sharp wide open across the whole zoom range. The optical stabilization works very nicely, and lets me handhold way beyond the conventional 1/shutter speed rule. In terms of the price it is noticeably cheaper than the Canon counterpart with a similar performance.

I am a big fan of FTMF, and unfortunately this one lacks it. However, the focus has been very accurate on my 60D and I have not needed FTMF so far.

I can wholeheartedly recommend this lens.

Oct 30, 2012

thevorlonOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 23, 2012Location: United StatesPosts: 0

Review Date: Oct 23, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $599.00
| Rating: 8

Pros:

Excellent lens - I have not seen the front focusing issues some other reviewers have posted. I looked at both the similar Tamron lens as well as the Canon lens. For the money the Sigma lens is the better choice.

This is an excellent lens. If it had the Canon's 17-55 low light focusing accuracy this would be by far the best lens in this focal range. As it is however one has to choose between superior low light focusing abilities af the Canon vs the superior resolution capabilities and the better close-up focusing abilities of the Sigma. Given the price difference, it's a no brainer in my mind.

I ordered the first copy last year - on my Canon 600D it has terrible front focus - i returned and get a new version just to realize that this copy has back focus - ons again i delivered it back and the store checked wit the cameras - the was indeed convinced that i was foully, i then get the third copy and ons again i had front focus - now i get my money back and ordered a Canon 17-55 IS - WOW what a lens - sorry

Feb 20, 2012

nolaprofOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 16, 2009Location: United StatesPosts: 18

Review Date: Jan 30, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9

Pros:

Cons:

Jan 30, 2012

timseleyOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 12, 2011Location: United StatesPosts: 0

Review Date: Jan 26, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $670.00
| Rating: 9

Pros:

build, image quality, price, stabilized

Cons:

a bit heavy

For shooting video this is my go to lens. I use it for probably 80% of the stuff that I shoot. The Tamron equivalent is also optically nice but the build quality doesn't feel nearly as sturdy/smooth as the Sigma and as I'm shooting video on Canon bodies the fact that the Tamron is backwards is a big con for me. The Canon is a nice lens too, but considering that the Sigma is so much cheaper there's no reason to go with the Canon over the Sig for me. The Sig is sharp, has good color, and is relatively affordable. Thumbs up.

Jan 26, 2012

tanglefoot47OfflineBuy and Sell: On

Registered: Oct 12, 2004Location: United StatesPosts: 14879

Review Date: Aug 27, 2011

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $650.00
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Sharp very sharp even at 2.8, nice finish, OS

Cons:

Not long enough but knew that when I bought so no big deal

First off I am not a Sigma fan I actually don't care for sig lenses. But this lens is awesome and a lot less money than the 17-55 IS but is very well built seems more solid than the Canon. Love the new finish way to go Sig

Aug 27, 2011

tom_mOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 2, 2010Location: United StatesPosts: 4

Review Date: Jun 21, 2011

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $669.00
| Rating: 10

Pros:

VERY sharp lens that is versatile. f/2.8 with image stabilization is great. The FLD glass is new and wonderful leaving the CA low. By far one of the better lenses out there in its class.

Cons:

No full time manual focus. The focus ring is narrow and very sensitive and it turns when auto-focusing and your hand (at least my hand) gets in the way. The zoom seems backwards which isn't a big deal but you turn the wrong way without thinking at first.

Plain and simple this lens is a contender! It's commonly compared to the Tamron 17-50mm and Canon 17-55mm. The other lens it is sometimes compared to is the Canon 17-40mm L. If you're shooting on a full frame sensor then you're only real choice here is the L lens...And it's a great lens. I don't own it but I've shot with it before.

However for those with cropped sensors...I'm telling ya, get this lens. If you're on a tight budget, get the Tamron. However, I'd probably just simply stay away from the Canon 17-55mm because I think it's overpriced. If it was an L series with image stabilization...Well, then maybe. Maybe it'd also cost more.

There are a TON of reviews on this lens, so read here and Google it up. I won't repeat what others have said.

However one thing I did not know when buying this lens.. This lens has the new Sigma finish. It does not have that "crinkle" finish. You know that kinda visually textured/sandy matte dull finish (which was pretty smooth to the touch but not glossy smooth). I actually liked the old finish...But many people did not because it could peel off with a lot of wear and tear. I never had that problem, but it's worth noting because you actually don't read about it much. I know it has nothing to do with image quality, but don't be surprised when you pull this EX lens out of the bag for the first time and it has a smooth plastic finish.

Jun 21, 2011

henrynvirginiaOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 13, 2010Location: United StatesPosts: 144

Review Date: Feb 9, 2011

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $669.00
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Well built, fast and accurate AF, very quiet OS system, sharp at all f stops. A great lens $400 less than Canon 17-55. Very satisfied.

Cons:

Only if you didn't know that you cannot MF while on AF. Not a problem for me.

Feb 9, 2011

thomas bulgerOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 7, 2007Location: United StatesPosts: 2

Review Date: Dec 29, 2010

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $669.00
| Rating: 9

Pros:

Well built, sharp, price and warranty

Cons:

no ftm.

I have owned the 17-40L and the 16-35L, this lens is far superior to both. It is easily as sharp as both L lenses and the focus is fast, quiet and dead on. I recently shot a gathering around a campfire and the lens focused without any issues. When others have viewed the images the first comment is "great colors".

I have not been happy with prior Sigma purchases and really agonized over this purchase. I must say that they have made a believer out of me.

Dec 29, 2010

micosOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 16, 2009Location: CanadaPosts: 0

Review Date: Nov 29, 2010

Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros:

Cons:

Follow up to my previous review - lens was overhauled and "re-programed" at Sigma service regarding back focus when used in dark with (Canon) external flash`s assist beam. Although Sigma`s Customer Service is by far the best one I have ever dealt with, along with Pentax many years ago (listen Canon ?) lens came back exactly the same. In the mean time I tested my friend`s lens and it has the same problem. I am suspecting that Sigma did some mistake in the lens software or simply ran on Canon`s AF booby trap :-). After all, it challenges seriously Canon`s EF-S flagship 17-55 2.8 IS at almost half the price.
I spoke with Sigma service technicians and it will go in again - seems they are intrigued with the problem. Anyhow, I would appreciate if any actual Sigma/Canon owner could test this lens and post the comment here.
The procedure would be to put on external flash, take some cereal box or anything square with clear lettering in very dark space and
take a couple of pictures. Flash assist beam will engage and "help" the lens to focus - or to miss, remain to be seen. F stop should be around F 3.5 or 4 enough to allow some DOF but not too much to affect the result. All original Canon lenses passed this test with ease and even Sigma does AF almost perfectly without IR beam - weird, at best!